General Cycling Discussion - Study of helmet-wearing

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa029&articleID=778EF0AB-E7F2-99DF-3594A60E4D9A76B2

Study concludes that cyclists wearing helmets are not given as much room by motorists. :(

The "study" and I use the term loosely is flawed big time. There should have been more riders on more roads perhaps even on the same road. Different times should have been analyzed. This data is for Britain and not other countries(cultures). And then there is this quote as well.


"The cars were giving him, on average, a very wide passing clearance already," he explains, noting that most vehicles typically stayed well over three feet from the bikes, rendering the 3.35-inch discrepancy to be insignificant. "If you really want the greatest passing distance, you should wobble down the road," looking as inept as possible, he adds.

This study has been posted so many times, I can't even stand to rehash my own witty responses. Wear a wig and daisy dukes and motorists will give you more room...right before they molest you.

In my own experience of sometimes wearing a helmet, and sometimes not, it doesn't matter. If a motorist is going to pass safely, they will. If the motorist happens to be a JAM, then they are going to try to prove it. Whether or not the cyclist has on a helmet is irrelevant.

This study has been posted so many times, I can't even stand to rehash my own witty responses...

Yeah, but I can rehash mine.


Randy Swart, founder of the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute (BHSI), says that studies such as Walker's run the risk of misleading cyclists as to the effectiveness of helmets.

:roflmao:

Maybe Randy Swart is doing the same thing?


Dorothy Robinson, a patron of the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation and a senior statistician at the University of New England in Armidale, Australia, published a 2006 review article in the BMJ (British Medical Journal) ...The newly instituted (MH) laws, she found, did not have a significant effect on bicycle accidents resulting in head injuries... Her conclusion was "helmets are not designed for forces often encountered in collisions with motor vehicles"



Walker... notes that when it comes to riding in traffic, motorists are the real problem.

Helmets also save you due to crashes we caused or not car related, like t boning a dog going down hill. Most people I know who have hit the ground hard did not involve a car, so keep wearing them people.

People shouldn't let people bone dogs...going up or down hill. Perv. :eek: :D

In my own experience as a motorist around cyclists, I personally am more comfortable driving around cyclists who look like they know what the heck they're doing. Cyclists wearing helmets generally fit into that category. Other signs include a steady cadence and the ability to pedal in a straight line.

I give them a safe, comfortable berth.

Those I don't trust not to awkwardly wobble their way into my lane I give an extra wide berth.

I have a suspicion the helmet-wearing cyclists aren't being endangered, but rather the non-helmet-wearing cyclists are being avoided.

Any thoughts?

My thought is that if you get hit by a car doing 45, the helmet is an afterthought. I wear a helmet for the much more common 'falling off the bike because i forgot to clip out' or 'running into a pole' or my favorite, 'riding a wal mart bike over a speed bump which then collapses my fork and slamming my head into the pavement and going to the hospital'.

In my own experience as a motorist around cyclists, I personally am more comfortable driving around cyclists who look like they know what the heck they're doing. Cyclists wearing helmets generally fit into that category. Other signs include a steady cadence and the ability to pedal in a straight line.

I give them a safe, comfortable berth.

Those I don't trust not to awkwardly wobble their way into my lane I give an extra wide berth.

I have a suspicion the helmet-wearing cyclists aren't being endangered, but rather the non-helmet-wearing cyclists are being avoided.

Any thoughts?

The premise that a helmet is any indication that a cyclist 'knows what the heck they are doing' is too silly to comment on - a pic is worth a thousand words.

http://www.sites.si.edu/images/exhibits/Sports/images/Lance-Armstrong_jpg.jpg

This study has been posted so many times, I can't even stand to rehash my own witty responses. Wear a wig and daisy dukes and motorists will give you more room...right before they molest you.


Works for me. Don't forget the red sequined pumps.

The premise that a helmet is any indication that a cyclist 'knows what the heck they are doing' is too silly to comment on - a pic is worth a thousand words.

It's just one of very many indicators. Actually, minor compared to the pedaling style and degree of visible wobble. I was just throwing it out as a possible explanation for the purported effect observed in this study. Like most factors, I expect there to be exceptions to the rule.

Additionally, regardless of whether helmet-wearing follows a general correlation with ability to not fall over into traffic, do you have any comments on the possibility that the average driver might unconsciously perceive that?